Author Topic: Imperial Precedent?  (Read 1235 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Imperial Precedent?
« on: June 28, 2014, 04:14:02 PM »
Serious question.  While I may be on vacation, the events that effect me, family, friends, and this country, are never too far from my thoughts.  I know many of you were not very happy with our former President Bush.  Whatever your reasons, I'm sure they were sincere, most notably his actions in taking us into Iraq.  Many of you may have voted for our current President, for precisely that reason.  Many of you may have voted for Obama, because you supported his "pledges & promises".  Many of you may have voted for him because you're dedicated Democrats, and their agenda.  All of which is perfectly reasonable, even rational.

But here's my question....are the same folks who voted for Obama seriously ok with how he's running the country? 

Ok, let's say you really support immigration reform, or absolutely support the idea of universal healthcare.  Again, very sincere, well intended ideas.  The way things are supposed to function in this country is that Congress passes laws, the President & Executive branch executes & enforces the laws, and the Judiciary clarifies any confusion with the law.  But you say Gary, what if Congress & the President can't get anything passed?  Well, the answer is, they work together to make things pass, or the electorate gets to rethink their decisions at who they voted for every 2 years.

How it's NOT supposed to work, is for a President to unilaterally decide what laws the executive branch is to enforce, and which ones they're going to ignore. 
How its NOT supposed to work is for a President to unilaterally decide, using his "pen", to enact executive orders to supersede current law. 
How its NOT supposed to work is for a President to take existing law and then decide for himself what portions will be implemented, and which ones won't, based on nothing more than what's politically palliative. 
How it's NOT supposed to work, is for a President to claim he can "borrow power from congress" to enact whatever he wants.  I must have missed the Borrowing Clause when they taught us about the Constitution in school.

But Gary, you say, other Presidents have written far more executive orders than Obama has.  To which the response is, the vast majority of those executive orders had nothing to do with rewriting existing law.  But Gary, you say, we need to reform immigration law, or reform energy policy, or whatever agenda item you might be supportive of.  Here's my response....when A Republican does return to the office of the President, you'll have no problem with said Republican President imposing whatever he wants, based on what he believes needs to be imposed??  An executive order that everyone must own a firearm??  A command to the Justice Dept to stop enforcing Roe v Wade??

You think these questions are outlandish?  You can think that I suppose, but the precedent being set is current reality, despite of what you think of my questions.  Is that what folks really want.....and Imperial Presidency or one that follows the rule of law, despite how hard things can be to get passed?  It's a simple this or that question 
« Last Edit: June 28, 2014, 04:55:51 PM by sirs »
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Imperial Precedent?
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2014, 12:14:03 AM »
Oh yeah, Obama is reigning over the country like a king, oppressing people right and left.

Except in foreign policy he is a weak powerless pathetic toad.

Make up your mind, fools.n

Stupid rightwingers have no sense at all.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Imperial Precedent?
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2014, 12:15:59 AM »
Oh yeah, Obama is reigning over the country like a king, oppressing people right and left.

Except in foreign policy he is a weak powerless pathetic toad.


This is exactly right , and exactly the opposite of what a conservative would want.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Imperial Precedent?
« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2014, 12:28:04 AM »
Oh yeah, Obama is reigning over the country like a king, oppressing people right and left.

Except in foreign policy he is a weak powerless pathetic toad.

Make up your mind, fools.n

Stupid rightwingers have no sense at all.


Obama has no control over what other countries decide to do.  Obama has complete control of what he's trying to do here in this country however.  Both can & DO currently co-exist quite nicely. 

But back to the point being made....you'd have no problem with a President Rubio or President Jindal deciding that the EPA will no longer strictly enforce current regulations??  Or that the Justice Dept will, per executive order, now press that everyone is to own a firearm, just like everyone must have Health Insurance??  No Problem with any GOP President deciding RvW need no longer be strictly enforced...just leave it to the states??  Really, you'd have no problem with any of those unilateral decisions??    :o
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Imperial Precedent?
« Reply #4 on: June 29, 2014, 01:25:56 PM »
I would have serious problems with any of that shit.
Conservatives these days are assholes, with the teabaggers champions of assholery.

You ahave some sort of fetish for symmetry between stupidity and intelligence, while I favor intelligence.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Imperial Precedent?
« Reply #5 on: June 29, 2014, 01:44:04 PM »
I would have serious problems with any of that shit.
Conservatives these days are assholes, with the teabaggers champions of assholery.

You ahave some sort of fetish for symmetry between stupidity and intelligence, while I favor intelligence.

I do not know what would give you the idea that I think that intelligence and stupidity require symmetry.

But whatever I did to give this impression , I really need to stop.

If you like intelligence , why do you like President Obama?

I can't prove he is the densest bonehead to ever hold that office , but he is obviously in the running.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Imperial Precedent?
« Reply #6 on: June 29, 2014, 02:35:03 PM »
I would have serious problems with any of that shit.

EXACTLY....now you know why there's such a huge portion of the country angry at how this President is currently doing the same.....even democrats are taking notice


Conservatives these days are assholes, with the teabaggers champions of assholery.

No different than the current crop of asshole Liberals, these days, at present championing their own uber-level of assholery.  None of which changes the point being made


You ahave some sort of fetish for symmetry between stupidity and intelligence, while I favor intelligence.

I have a fetish for "fairness" & the Rule of Law, both which are absolutely necessary to run a free democratic society, and don't put up with blatant hypocrites who support the current actions of their guy, but would have "serious problems" if someone else were pulling the same crap, with an R after their name.  You see, I wouldn't put up with it, even if it were a Republican pulling this imperialistic power play.  I actually support the Rule of Law, as opposed to the likes of you and your asshole power hungry hardcore liberal brethren, who apparently care squat about the Constitution, and how this country was made great
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Imperial Precedent?
« Reply #7 on: June 29, 2014, 02:37:59 PM »
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/neil-cavuto-michele-bachmann-obama-lawsuit-108316.html


Neil Cavuto just thinks for himself.

This does occasionally rub the wrong way.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Imperial Precedent?
« Reply #8 on: June 29, 2014, 02:39:32 PM »
If you like intelligence , why do you like President Obama?

I can't prove he is the densest bonehead to ever hold that office , but he is obviously in the running.


I disagree Plane.  I see Obama as acutely intelligent, he just doesn't care.  He has an agenda to "fundamentally transform this country", and he's not going to let things like the Constitution or Rule of Law, get in his way.  And with the help of the MSM, and repetative use of the race card & delay to deflect serious criticism or examination of his actions, he just might get away with it.

And the scary part is that there are many who actually support these actions, knowing he can't and won't ever be impeached
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Imperial Precedent?
« Reply #9 on: June 29, 2014, 03:03:06 PM »
  What evidence is there that President Obama has better than average IQ?



    I can't see it , he seems to be depending a lot of the teleprompter to sound glib.

    He is prone to delegate the entire "thinking " task, as it was for the writing of "Obamacare".
 
     A complete list of his non sequiters  would look like an unabridged dictionary.

       As a "constitutional scholar" he seems to understand the rulebook poorly, note the recent unanimous SCOTUS ruling.

        Perhaps he is smarter than I can fathom, but is he really hiding the evidence this well?